KyleB

Kyle vs Bruno

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Rdk4121 said:

There is no use arguing with pat about Kyle's shooting. People ignore Kyle completely when he takes 3s, and even midrange jumpers. Just watch his highlights. He's not a 3 point shooter, it's just as simple as that, but he'll never seem to understand that. 

If we want to beat the dead horse...

Kyle Anderon has played 5,882 regular season minutes in his career. He has made a total of 58 three-pointers in that time. 32.4% and makes 1 three-pointer for every 101.4 minutes played.

Bruno Caboclo has played 1,013 regular season minutes in his career. He has made a total of 56 three-pointers in that time. 34.4% and makes 1 three-pointer for every 18.1 minutes played.

We don't know whether Bruno can shoot threes consistently or space the floor due to a small sample size of 69 games. He might be a good floor spacer and I'd like to see if that's the case or not.

We've had 300 games to see that Kyle rarely shoots threes and, when he does, shoots them below league average. Perhaps his impact in other facets of the game can make up for this, but I'm not counting on him ever spacing the floor for anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is so hung up on threes.  I think Kyle is a better overall basketball player and also think that we will be a better basketball team with him on the floor, despite his inability to shoot and make threes at a high volume, instead of a guy who only does that one thing better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, smit-tay griz said:

Everyone is so hung up on threes.  I think Kyle is a better overall basketball player and also think that we will be a better basketball team with him on the floor, despite his inability to shoot and make threes at a high volume, instead of a guy who only does that one thing better.

We won't know how things shake out until the season starts; but I would feel safer with Kyle playing over Bruno.  Bruno is an amazing physical specimen and his potential is off the charts...but man, he's as sharp as a tennis ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CarloJ63 said:

We won't know how things shake out until the season starts; but I would feel safer with Kyle playing over Bruno.  Bruno is an amazing physical specimen and his potential is off the charts...but man, he's as sharp as a tennis ball.

Yeah.  I think we need to see how things look on the floor with different players playing together to see how they work together.  I don't think that team chemistry is some cut-and-dried formula which says we need players who do certain things, and if they can't it wont work.  Sometimes there are other unforeseen traits which figure in and make a good match.  Don't get me wrong, I like Bruno and I am hoping he is just a late developer and that he keeps improving.  Right now though, I think that playing Kyle at SF makes us a better team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really like to see Kyle, BC and Bruno play a lot of minutes together.  They would be very interesting defensively together.  I like Bruno as the backup C, BC as the backup PF and Kyle as the backup SF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kevofrommempho said:

I'd really like to see Kyle, BC and Bruno play a lot of minutes together.  They would be very interesting defensively together.  I like Bruno as the backup C, BC as the backup PF and Kyle as the backup SF.

I could roll with that as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before people get too excited or depressed about our small forwards perhaps we should look at what's he's actually done so far in his career. 

Josh Jackson's Career Advanced Stats
Josh Jackson's Career Actual Stats

Kyle Anderson's Career Advanced Stats
Kyle Anderson's Career Actual Stats

Jae Crowder's Career Advanced Stats
Jae Crowder's Career Actual Stats

Dillon Brooks Career Advanced Stats
Dillon Brook's Career Actual Stats


Josh's career numbers after two seasons in Phoenix are 41% from the field and 32% from the arc. His assists went up in his second season but so did his turnovers. His rebounds went down as well but the most glaring problem I see is his FT% which at 67.1% last season was an improvement over his rookie season. People who can't shoot free throws don't usually find their shots consistently on the wings. 

If you want someone who takes a ton of shots but are inefficient then both Josh Jackson and/or Jae Crowder fit the bill quite nicely.

Kyle Anderson's career suggests that he is not only a poor perimeter shooter but he is also aware of this as he doesn't take a lot of 3 pt shots. Dillon Brooks has shown some promise as a perimeter shooter, but his PER numbers are the worst of the bunch suggesting that he is not contributing to a winning team effort. 

There is one player most posters are forgetting about who could be a huge addition to the team however. 

Andre Iguodala's Career Advanced Stats
Andre Iguodala's Career Actual Stats

Iggy has the highest PER of any of the players at SF, he has a career 3 pt% (33.3) that is in the neighborhood of Crowder and equates to shooting 50% from inside the arc making him someone you have to respect at least. He is a fine defensive player and a great leader also. The team is fielding trade offers of course but come opening night if he is still on the roster I suspect he would be the most logical player to start.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, chipc3 said:

The team is fielding trade offers of course but come opening night if he is still on the roster I suspect he would be the most logical player to start.  

Iggy is clearly the best of the bunch, but he's not the answer long term.  His main value to us is what we can get for him in a trade.  Playing him exposes him to injury risk.  Even if we don't trade him until the deadline, I doubt he plays a minute for the Grizzlies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kevofrommempho said:

Iggy is clearly the best of the bunch, but he's not the answer long term.  His main value to us is what we can get for him in a trade.  Playing him exposes him to injury risk.  Even if we don't trade him until the deadline, I doubt he plays a minute for the Grizzlies.

Not playing him will cause a drop in his trade value. I hope you are wrong in assuming he won't play for the Grizzlies. He has a lot to offer a young team in search of a real leader. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2019 at 1:00 PM, chipc3 said:

Before people get too excited or depressed about our small forwards perhaps we should look at what's he's actually done so far in his career. 

Josh Jackson's Career Advanced Stats
Josh Jackson's Career Actual Stats

Kyle Anderson's Career Advanced Stats
Kyle Anderson's Career Actual Stats

Jae Crowder's Career Advanced Stats
Jae Crowder's Career Actual Stats

Dillon Brooks Career Advanced Stats
Dillon Brook's Career Actual Stats


Josh's career numbers after two seasons in Phoenix are 41% from the field and 32% from the arc. His assists went up in his second season but so did his turnovers. His rebounds went down as well but the most glaring problem I see is his FT% which at 67.1% last season was an improvement over his rookie season. People who can't shoot free throws don't usually find their shots consistently on the wings. 

If you want someone who takes a ton of shots but are inefficient then both Josh Jackson and/or Jae Crowder fit the bill quite nicely.

Kyle Anderson's career suggests that he is not only a poor perimeter shooter but he is also aware of this as he doesn't take a lot of 3 pt shots. Dillon Brooks has shown some promise as a perimeter shooter, but his PER numbers are the worst of the bunch suggesting that he is not contributing to a winning team effort. 

There is one player most posters are forgetting about who could be a huge addition to the team however. 

Andre Iguodala's Career Advanced Stats
Andre Iguodala's Career Actual Stats

Iggy has the highest PER of any of the players at SF, he has a career 3 pt% (33.3) that is in the neighborhood of Crowder and equates to shooting 50% from inside the arc making him someone you have to respect at least. He is a fine defensive player and a great leader also. The team is fielding trade offers of course but come opening night if he is still on the roster I suspect he would be the most logical player to start.  

We have a nice little battle at SF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruno isn't a SF and shouldn't be in this discussion. That being said, in my opinion, anyone who thinks Kyle would provide more spacing than Bruno is delusional. Kyle is definitely the better player at this point though.

The worst part about all of this is I just read 5 pages reminding we how awful we will be next year. None of these guys would deserve to start a .500 team. We are going to suck so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2019 at 4:51 PM, Rdk4121 said:

There is no use arguing with pat about Kyle's shooting. People ignore Kyle completely when he takes 3s, and even midrange jumpers. Just watch his highlights. He's not a 3 point shooter, it's just as simple as that, but he'll never seem to understand that. 

So you have moved on from making false statements about me to just implying them. Way to go. Keep at it and eventually you just might settle on being honest for a change.

I never claimed that Kyle was "a 3 point shooter", or whatever that may imply. You stated that "Kyle can't shoot, and probably never will be able to". That is not a truthful statement. Shooting does not involve only making long 3's, which is the only distance that Kyle is below league average for making his shots. Volume of shots and long 3's do not define if a player can shoot or not, and to suggest it is simply foolish. If you follow basketball at all, you would know that there is a huge difference between a player that can't shoot and a player that is not a shooter.

Kyle isn't a shooter. So what? The option list this season will probably be JJJ, then Ja, then JV. If options 4 and 5 were shooters they would be wasted anyway, as they wouldn't get many looks. This season is about building JJJ and Ja. The more opportunities they have, the quicker they develop. The Grizzlies do not want an option before those two this coming season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Father Pat said:

The option list this season will probably be JJJ, then Ja, then JV. If options 4 and 5 were shooters they would be wasted anyway, as they wouldn't get many looks. This season is about building JJJ and Ja. The more opportunities they have, the quicker they develop. The Grizzlies do not want an option before those two this coming season.

agreed - wholeheartedly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Father Pat said:

So you have moved on from making false statements about me to just implying them. Way to go. Keep at it and eventually you just might settle on being honest for a change.

I never claimed that Kyle was "a 3 point shooter", or whatever that may imply. You stated that "Kyle can't shoot, and probably never will be able to". That is not a truthful statement. Shooting does not involve only making long 3's, which is the only distance that Kyle is below league average for making his shots. Volume of shots and long 3's do not define if a player can shoot or not, and to suggest it is simply foolish. If you follow basketball at all, you would know that there is a huge difference between a player that can't shoot and a player that is not a shooter.

Kyle isn't a shooter. So what? The option list this season will probably be JJJ, then Ja, then JV. If options 4 and 5 were shooters they would be wasted anyway, as they wouldn't get many looks. This season is about building JJJ and Ja. The more opportunities they have, the quicker they develop. The Grizzlies do not want an option before those two this coming season.

You are possibly the most annoying person on the planet or the ultimate troll. I clearly didn't mean "Kyle doesn't not possess the ability to shoot a basketball." It's just slight hyperbole, you don't have to take everything literally. I saw you say something along those lines to someone, just use your brain a little bit, my goodness. Everyone in basketball "can" shoot, heck everyone with arms can shoot. He doesn't shoot or make 3s at even a below average rate in the NBA. We are clearly talking about taking 3s and spacing the floor, how you hadn't caught onto that is beyond me man. 

As for that last paragraph, boy that's a doozy. Having a shooter that spaces the floor and gives them room to operate is exactly what they need. Have you heard of this revolutionary concept called 3&D? JJ Reddick was probably the 4th or 5th option when he shared the court Embiid,  Butler, Harris, and Simmons, right? Did that make him wasted as an asset? No. Did he stunt the development of Simmons and Embiid? No, but he did space the floor for Simmons and butler to drive, and didn't allow his man to cheat down and double team Embiid in the post. Clearly we don't have anyone near that level, but the concept is still the exact same. Nobody else on the roster is going to take as many shots as the 3 you mentioned or will stunt the development of Ja or Jaren. But it can't just be them. Think about Murray and Jokic. While they obviously get the lion's share of touches they're still surrounded by shooters with Harris, Barton, Milsap, and Beasley. Neither have to do everything either, which they shouldn't have to. 

Your responses can only elicit a yikes from me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2019 at 3:06 PM, Rdk4121 said:

Kyle is a career 32 perfect 3 point shooter, even worse last year, but only averages .6 attempts per game. 

People don't just dare 37% 3 point shooter (which is what bruno shot last year), to take wide open shots like you suggest. I mean they might help off him some, but they aren't just going to completely ignore him either like they more or less can with Kyle.

Bruno has a game that can be improved significantly by playing with a point guard like Ja. The more attention Ja draws, the more wide open 3s or backdoor cuts/ lobs will be available for him. Kyle can't shoot, and probably never will be able to, and clearly isn't a lob target. So he's very functionally limited in any offense where the ball isn't in his hands, which isn't going to be in his hands often. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rdk4121 said:

Don't feed the troll. 

You're the one posting lies, implying lies, lying about what you said, then dismissing it as "slight hyperbole", and you call me the troll????

You and I have different opinions. Deal with it without making it personal, and try being more honest. If what you post has merit then you don't need to use dishonesty to further your point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, lsugrizzfan said:

Bruno isn't a SF and shouldn't be in this discussion. That being said, in my opinion, anyone who thinks Kyle would provide more spacing than Bruno is delusional. Kyle is definitely the better player at this point though.

The worst part about all of this is I just read 5 pages reminding we how awful we will be next year. None of these guys would deserve to start a .500 team. We are going to suck so much.

Neither player is a starting SF option. Kyle is only a starting SF if both bigs roam the perimeter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rdk4121 said:

You are possibly the most annoying person on the planet or the ultimate troll. I clearly didn't mean "Kyle doesn't not possess the ability to shoot a basketball." It's just slight hyperbole, you don't have to take everything literally. I saw you say something along those lines to someone, just use your brain a little bit, my goodness. Everyone in basketball "can" shoot, heck everyone with arms can shoot. He doesn't shoot or make 3s at even a below average rate in the NBA. We are clearly talking about taking 3s and spacing the floor, how you hadn't caught onto that is beyond me man. 

As for that last paragraph, boy that's a doozy. Having a shooter that spaces the floor and gives them room to operate is exactly what they need. Have you heard of this revolutionary concept called 3&D? JJ Reddick was probably the 4th or 5th option when he shared the court Embiid,  Butler, Harris, and Simmons, right? Did that make him wasted as an asset? No. Did he stunt the development of Simmons and Embiid? No, but he did space the floor for Simmons and butler to drive, and didn't allow his man to cheat down and double team Embiid in the post. Clearly we don't have anyone near that level, but the concept is still the exact same. Nobody else on the roster is going to take as many shots as the 3 you mentioned or will stunt the development of Ja or Jaren. But it can't just be them. Think about Murray and Jokic. While they obviously get the lion's share of touches they're still surrounded by shooters with Harris, Barton, Milsap, and Beasley. Neither have to do everything either, which they shouldn't have to. 

Your responses can only elicit a yikes from me. 

Bro why argue with that guy. He obviously knows he’s wrong but will take the slightest word you say and turn it around. I wish I could find Kyle’s percentage on long 2’s so I could demonstrate how non existent his range is, unfortunately he’ll probably start talking about his ball handling or his great bone structure or some other irrelevant nonsense. 

Im not jumping off that when keeping it real goes wrong bridge with that guy and neither should anyone else. 

Lastly, Kyle can’t shoot with enough range to effectively clear the paint for Ja or JJJ drives and to eliminate Jonas getting doubled in the post. But facts don’t matter in this discussion. #TradeKyleByTheTradeDeadline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, King Dork said:

Bro why argue with that guy. He obviously knows he’s wrong but will take the slightest word you say and turn it around. I wish I could find Kyle’s percentage on long 2’s so I could demonstrate how non existent his range is, unfortunately he’ll probably start talking about his ball handling or his great bone structure or some other irrelevant nonsense. 

Im not jumping off that when keeping it real goes wrong bridge with that guy and neither should anyone else. 

Lastly, Kyle can’t shoot with enough range to effectively clear the paint for Ja or JJJ drives and to eliminate Jonas getting doubled in the post. But facts don’t matter in this discussion. #TradeKyleByTheTradeDeadline

Easy to find.  50% from 16 feet to the three-point line last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dwash said:

Neither player is a starting SF option. Kyle is only a starting SF if both bigs roam the perimeter.

I agree. I like both players....as 9th or 10th men. Unfortunately, they are going to play fairly big roles on this team. For me, that is depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just occurred to me that some fans might be getting their idea's about spacing from a video game.

Spacing is maximized by ball movement and offensive player movement. How did the Warriors under Marc Jackson go from a first round washout to world champs the following season under Steve Kerr? SPACING. Kerr created more spacing with player and ball movement. Good spacing is created. Spacing is earned, not given. ISO basketball has no spacing. The ball isn't passed and the other players don't move. No movement = no spacing. The Marc Jackson Warriors were dead last in the league for the average number of passes per game. He had them playing a heavy ISO game, and they won 50 games doing it. With nearly the same roster Kerr added ball and player movement, won more games and a championship. Kerr created spacing. 

The Spurs create spacing with ball and player movement. They are among the league leaders every season for average passes per game. Now here comes the reality check; if Kyle was a spacing killer, would he have played on the Spurs for 4 seasons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Father Pat said:

It just occurred to me that some fans might be getting their idea's about spacing from a video game.

Spacing is maximized by ball movement and offensive player movement. How did the Warriors under Marc Jackson go from a first round washout to world champs the following season under Steve Kerr? SPACING. Kerr created more spacing with player and ball movement. Good spacing is created. Spacing is earned, not given. ISO basketball has no spacing. The ball isn't passed and the other players don't move. No movement = no spacing. The Marc Jackson Warriors were dead last in the league for the average number of passes per game. He had them playing a heavy ISO game, and they won 50 games doing it. With nearly the same roster Kerr added ball and player movement, won more games and a championship. Kerr created spacing. 

The Spurs create spacing with ball and player movement. They are among the league leaders every season for average passes per game. Now here comes the reality check; if Kyle was a spacing killer, would he have played on the Spurs for 4 seasons?

I agree with you that spacing is dictated by player movement and ball movement. I disagree with you that Kyle is automatically good at spacing or he wouldn't have played four seasons with the Spurs. I think Pop does a great job working around players warts. Also I think the argument is that given the same system and player movement, a player who is a better shooter and a more willing shooter will provide more space than a player who isn't. If you're arguing that Kyle's passing makes him better at spacing, I guess I can see your argument. But I don't agree with it. I just tend to think shooting is more important than passing if the same system and player movement is in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Father Pat said:

It just occurred to me that some fans might be getting their idea's about spacing from a video game.

Spacing is maximized by ball movement and offensive player movement. How did the Warriors under Marc Jackson go from a first round washout to world champs the following season under Steve Kerr? SPACING. Kerr created more spacing with player and ball movement. Good spacing is created. Spacing is earned, not given. ISO basketball has no spacing. The ball isn't passed and the other players don't move. No movement = no spacing. The Marc Jackson Warriors were dead last in the league for the average number of passes per game. He had them playing a heavy ISO game, and they won 50 games doing it. With nearly the same roster Kerr added ball and player movement, won more games and a championship. Kerr created spacing. 

The Spurs create spacing with ball and player movement. They are among the league leaders every season for average passes per game. Now here comes the reality check; if Kyle was a spacing killer, would he have played on the Spurs for 4 seasons?

Yet they were willing to pay Rudy Gay and Marco Bellinelli before him.

You can still move the ball with Kyle out there, however, if he is standing in a spot where he is no threat (usually the corner) and is forced to receive the ball then the action stops. Its really no need to make this harder than it is. He isnt a good perimeter offensive player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now